Bill Summary
The resolution impeaches James E. Boasberg, Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, on charges of "high crimes and misdemeanors." The primary accusation outlined in the article of impeachment is abuse of power. It alleges that Judge Boasberg improperly authorized Special Counsel John L. Smith to issue nondisclosure orders that infringe upon the constitutional privileges of Members of Congress as they perform their legislative duties. These orders are claimed to have targeted specific senators and representatives, imposing undue legal scrutiny and potentially threatening their ability to fulfill their responsibilities.
The resolution argues that Judge Boasberg acted outside of his judicial authority and misinterpreted legal statutes, indicating a lack of understanding of the law. It further suggests that his actions may have been politically motivated, aimed at silencing conservative organizations and activists. The resolution concludes that these actions compromise the integrity of the judiciary and the separation of powers, making Judge Boasberg unfit to continue serving in his position. Therefore, it calls for his removal from office.
Possible Impacts
The resolution to impeach Chief Judge James E. Boasberg could have several significant effects on individuals and political processes. Here are three examples:
1. **Impact on Congressional Members**: The resolution highlights that Judge Boasberg's actions have allegedly threatened the constitutional duties of Members of Congress by imposing legal scrutiny on them through nondisclosure orders. This could lead to increased anxiety and caution among legislators, potentially stifling their ability to perform their legislative functions freely. If lawmakers fear legal repercussions for their actions, they may become less willing to engage in robust debate or oversight, undermining the legislative process.
2. **Chilling Effect on Political Speech**: The mention of subpoenas targeting conservative nonprofit organizations and activists suggests that such actions could deter individuals and groups from expressing their political views or engaging in political activities. If people fear legal consequences for their political speech or affiliations, they may choose to remain silent or withdraw from political activism, which can diminish public discourse and civic engagement.
3. **Public Confidence in the Judiciary**: The impeachment resolution raises questions about the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system. If the public perceives that judges can be politically motivated or misuse their powers, it may lead to a loss of trust in the judiciary as a fair arbiter of justice. This erosion of trust could impact how individuals view legal institutions and their willingness to seek redress through the courts, ultimately affecting the rule of law and public faith in democratic processes.
[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 858 Introduced in House (IH)]
<DOC>
119th CONGRESS
1st Session
H. RES. 858
Impeaching James E. Boasberg, United States District Court Chief Judge
for the District of Columbia, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
November 4, 2025
Mr. Gill of Texas (for himself, Mr. Roy, Mr. Fine, Mr. Donalds, Ms.
Boebert, Mrs. Luna, Mr. Biggs of Arizona, Mr. Self, Mr. Stutzman, Mr.
Crane, Mr. Ogles, and Mr. Collins) submitted the following resolution;
which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
_______________________________________________________________________
RESOLUTION
Impeaching James E. Boasberg, United States District Court Chief Judge
for the District of Columbia, for high crimes and misdemeanors.
Resolved, That James E. Boasberg, Chief Judge, United States Court
for the District of Columbia, is impeached for high crimes and
misdemeanors, and that the following article of impeachment be
exhibited to the United States Senate.
Article of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives
of the United States of America in the name of itself and of the people
of the United States of America, against James E. Boasberg, who was
appointed, duly qualified, and commissioned to serve, during good
behavior in office, to be United States District Judge for the District
of Columbia on March 14, 2011.
article i: abuse of power
Ignoring his responsibility to wield the power of his office in a
constitutional manner, Chief Judge Boasberg granted Special Counsel
John L. Smith authorization to issue frivolous nondisclosure orders in
furtherance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation project codenamed
ARCTIC FROST. These nondisclosure orders covered Members of Congress
who were acting in accord with their legislative duties and privileges
guaranteed by article 1, section 6, clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution.
Chief Judge Boasberg authorized the issuance of frivolous nondisclosure
orders covering at least Senator Marsha Blackburn, Senator Ted Cruz,
Senator Lindsey Graham, Senator Bill Hagerty, Senator Josh Hawley,
Senator Ron Johnson, Senator Cynthia Lummis, Senator Rick Scott,
Senator Dan Sullivan, Senator Tommy Tuberville, and Representative Mike
Kelly. These illegitimate and frivolous nondisclosure orders and
subpoenas threaten Members of Congress by imposing undue legal scrutiny
for fulfilling their constitutional duties. Chief Judge Boasberg signed
an order prohibiting AT&T from informing Senator Cruz of his subpoena
for at least one year. Chief Judge Boasberg expressed that there were
``reasonable grounds to believe that such disclosure will result in
destruction of or tampering with evidence, intimidation of potential
witnesses, and serious jeopardy to the investigation.'' Chief Judge
Boasberg had no clear reasonable basis to make this finding about
Senator Cruz, which accused him of being willing to destroy evidence
and intimidate witnesses in violation of both the law and Senator
Cruz's ethical obligation as a member of the Bar.
2 United States Code Sec. 6628 states ``the Office of the SAA, any
officer, employee, or agent of the Office of the SAA, and any provider
for a Senate office that is providing services to or used by a Senate
office shall not be barred, through operation of any court order or any
statutory provision, from notifying the Senate office of any legal
process seeking disclosure of Senate data of the Senate office that is
transmitted, processed, or stored (whether temporarily or otherwise)
through the use of an electronic system established, maintained, or
operated, or the use of electronic services provided . . .'' Chief
Judge Boasberg does not appreciate basic statute and contributed to the
legal inquiries that violate the law indicating he is unfit to serve as
Chief Judge.
It is unclear if Judge Boasberg facilitated the frivolous subpoenas
issued by Special Counsel John L. Smith which covered conservative
nonprofit organizations, including but not limited to Conservative
Partnership Institute, America First Policy Institute, Women for
America First, and Center for Renewing America. Many of these same
organizations had been outspoken in opposition to various radical Biden
Administration policies. It appears that these subpoenas were intended
to silence political speech.
In addition, these frivolous subpoenas covered conservative
activists and patriotic Americans, including Jeffrey Clark, John
Eastman, Rudy Guiliani, Edward Corrigan, Mark Meadows, Cleta Mitchell,
Amy Kremer, Kelli Ward, Jenna Ellis, and Wesley Denton. The
weaponization of the judiciary compromises the separation of powers
found in the U.S. Constitution, and Chief Judge Boasberg's impropriety
in participating in the undue investigation of Members of Congress
casts doubt on his ability to execute his office with good behavior.
Wherefore, Chief Judge Boasberg is guilty of high crimes and
misdemeanors and should be removed from office.
<all>